Sarcasm aside: then why do the bones of neanderthals and other evolutionary ancestors to humanity exist (not ape-men, of course, because that's an absurd misrepresentation of what evolution states)?

More to the point of the topic, why do these bones and others in the geological record lie in the order predicted by evolution, rather than being sorted by weight like would be the result of a flood? Why are stone tools, copper tools, tools of any other sort, and all other manmade items that should be on the bottom of the sediment in a flood model, always higher in the geological column than dinosaurs?

Someone's an embarrassment, but I don't think it's the biologists and others who have actual evidence to back up their claims...

Sorry, but I heard about the giant tsunami on the Science Discovery Channel and then again on the History cChannel. So it absolutely did come from scientists

These are the same channels that regularly show programs on UFOs and ghosts. These programs are entertainment. None of what you see on these ridiculous shows are from scientific journals.

And the only "evidence" for evolution is looking at skulls and bones and imagining what they could be. That's called science fiction, not science. So it's about as much evidence as looking at a woman who looks like someone I know then claiming that she's related to that person. That's called speculation, not fact.

Fortunately, that's not all evolution relies on. The bones are one small piece of the puzzle - evolution would stand WITHOUT any fossils at all, simply from OBSERVED CHANGES IN EXTANT SPECIES. If you'd like to discuss all of this, start another thread - it's not really relevant to the flood, except in noting that fossils are sorted as evolution predicts in the geologic column, and nowhere near what would be predicted in a massive flood model.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

Note that Peg makes the most common Creationist failing: instead of presenting evidence to support her version of events, she simply attacks the conclusions of the opposition, as if there are only two choices, and if she invalidates part of all of modern geology then she somehow proves that the Flood happened by default.

It doesn't work that way. Even if Peg were to successfully turn modern geology on it's head with her questions regarding so-called "inconsistencies" in geological layers, she still would have produced no evidence whatsoever of a global Flood. After all, even if all of modern science is wrong, evolution never happened, modern estimates of the age of the Earth are completely off, radiological dating is unreliable, etc, the Bible could also be wrong.

Maybe the Hindus got it right.

Or maybe nobody did, and we're all wrong.

In any case, until and unless Peg starts posting evidence that supports the occurrence of a global Flood some thousands of years ago (hopefully with something more substantial than "I disagree," or "that part of the Earth is covered in water means that all of the Earth was covered in water at one point"), she's still failing.